The Korean journal of internal medicine

The Korean Association of Internal Medicine (대한내과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Usefulness of nasal cavity evaluation before high-resolution esophageal manometry in high-risk patients

  • Hyun Jin Min (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jae Yong Park (Department of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2023.06.20
  • Accepted : 2023.07.21
  • Published : 2024.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background/Aims: A catheter is inserted through the nasal cavity during high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM), which may cause adverse events such as pain or epistaxis. Despite these possible safety considerations, studies on this subject are very limited. We aimed to investigate the usefulness of nasal cavity evaluation before HRM to reduce the risk of adverse events and test failure. Methods: Patients who underwent HRM after consultation with the ear-nose-throat department for nasal evaluation were retrospectively enrolled between December 2021 and May 2022. The included patients had a previous history of sinonasal disease or surgery or had subjective nasal discomfort. All patients answered the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) questionnaire, and subjective nasal discomfort was scored using a visual analog scale. Nasal endoscopy and acoustic rhinometry were performed for disease evaluation and volumetric assessment. Results: The analysis included 22 patients with a mean age of 58.9 years. The mean SNOT-22 score was 24.2, and 16 patients (72.7%) complained of subjective nasal obstruction. The HRM catheter was successfully inserted in 20 patients (90.9%), without any significant adverse events. The objective measurement outcomes of acoustic rhinometry and sinus endoscopy did not always correspond to subjective symptoms. Narrowed nasal airways unresponsive to decongestants were observed in two patients with failed catheter insertion. Conclusions: To reduce the risk of adverse events and test failure during HRM, a site-specific questionnaire to evaluate nasal obstruction might be helpful. When nasal obstruction is suspected, objective nasal cavity evaluation could be recommended for the safe and successful performance of HRM.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (2022R1F1A1063720).

References

  1. Savarino E, Marabotto E, Bodini G, et al. Advancements in the use of manometry and impedance testing for esophageal functional disorders. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019;13:425-435. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474124.2019.1595587
  2. Jung HK, Hong SJ, Lee OY, et al.; Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility. 2019 Seoul consensus on esophageal achalasia guidelines. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2020;26:180-203. https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm20014
  3. Pauwels A, Boecxstaens V, Andrews CN, et al. How to select patients for antireflux surgery? The ICARUS guidelines (international consensus regarding preoperative examinations and clinical characteristics assessment to select adult patients for antireflux surgery). Gut 2019;68:1928-1941. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-318260
  4. Seo HS, Choi M, Son SY, Kim MG, Han DS, Lee HH. Evidence-based practice guideline for surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease 2018. J Gastric Cancer 2018;18:313-327. https://doi.org/10.5230/jgc.2018.18.e41
  5. van Hoeij FB, Bredenoord AJ. Clinical application of esophageal high-resolution manometry in the diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2016;22:6-13. https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm15177
  6. Carmel Neiderman NN, Eisenberg N, Caspi I, et al. The effect of septal deviation on postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing radiofrequency-assisted turbinate reduction. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol 2022;7:325-334. https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.759
  7. Bredenoord AJ, Hebbard GS. Technical aspects of clinical high-resolution manometry studies. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2012;24 Suppl 1:5-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2982.2011.01830.x
  8. Andre RF, Vuyk HD, Ahmed A, Graamans K, Nolst Trenite GJ. Correlation between subjective and objective evaluation of the nasal airway. A systematic review of the highest level of evidence. Clin Otolaryngol 2009;34:518-525. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.02042.x
  9. Salihoglu M, Cekin E, Altundag A, Cesmeci E. Examination versus subjective nasal obstruction in the evaluation of the nasal septal deviation. Rhinology 2014;52:122-126. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino13.057
  10. Knigge MA, Marvin S, Thibeault SL. Safety and tolerability of pharyngeal high-resolution manometry. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2019;28:43-52. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_AJSLP-18-0039
  11. Noh Y, Choi JE, Lee KE, et al. A comparison of olfactory and sinonasal outcomes in endoscopic pituitary surgery performed by a single neurosurgeon or a collaborative team of surgeons. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2020;13:261-267. https://doi.org/10.21053/ceo.2019.01466
  12. Krzych-Falta E, Szczesnowicz-Dabrowska P, Samolinski B, Grzanka A, Wojas O. The normal ranges of selected acoustic rhinometry parameters depending on age and sex-component of standarization in nasal provocation test. Postepy Dermatol Alergol 2022;39:171-181. https://doi.org/10.5114/ada.2021.105360
  13. Kahrilas PJ, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, et al.; International High Resolution Manometry Working Group. The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015;27:160-174. https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.12477
  14. Jung HJ, Kim JH, Kang MH, Lee DW. Effects of proton pump inhibitor for laryngopharyngeal reflux and comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis. Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg 2019;62:165-170. https://doi.org/10.3342/kjorl-hns.2018.00521
  15. Farhood Z, Schlosser RJ, Pearse ME, Storck KA, Nguyen SA, Soler ZM. Twenty-two-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test in a control population: a cross-sectional study and systematic review. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2016;6:271-277. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.21668
  16. Toma S, Hopkins C. Stratification of SNOT-22 scores into mild, moderate or severe and relationship with other subjective instruments. Rhinology 2016;54:129-133. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino15.072
  17. Cohen MA, Setzen M, Perlman PW, Ditkoff M, Mattucci KF, Guss J. The safety of flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing in an outpatient otolaryngology setting. Laryngoscope 2003;113:21-24. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200301000-00004
  18. Aviv JE, Kaplan ST, Thomson JE, Spitzer J, Diamond B, Close LG. The safety of flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST): an analysis of 500 consecutive evaluations. Dysphagia 2000;15:39-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004559910008
  19. Chavan A, Maran R, Meena K. Diagnostic evaluation of chronic nasal obstruction based on nasal endoscopy and CT scan paranasal sinus. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019;71(Suppl 3):1948-1952. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-018-1376-6